The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-05-07
REVIEW OF GEN. WOLSELEY'S
PAPER BY JEFFERSON DAVIS.

To the Editor of the Courier'Journal;
Pie ass accept my thanks for your
paper containing a recently published
article by Gen. Lord Wolseley on Gen.
r. E. Lse.
One would reasonably suppose that
an eminent soldier, when writing OF
another of world wide fame, aud OF
military affaire, which, to no small ex.
tent, have become historical, would
cor fiue himself to ascertainable facts,
instead of adopting the style OF SEN
sational novelist and manufacturing
accessories with the freedom oil
romancer. That such is the character
of Gen. Wolesley's article propose
In brief review to demonstrate.
We of the South & atefully accept
the eulogy, which could not exceed
the esteem and love and honor in
which we hold the memory OF Lee;
INIT we, who knew him best, feel that
he needs no pedestal constructed OF
fine wrecks OF his associates reputa-
tion. The true recital of his deeds Is
his best eulcgy, and that which alone
sccorde with his moral worth.
Though Lee had full confidence IN
the valor and constaucy of his troops,
and they implicitly coDfded in him,
and though his frequent attacks on
the enemy, Notwithstanding the dis
parity of numbers and the inferiority
of his arms and equipments, show bis
daring and cembstive temper, We are
indebted to Gen. Wolseley for the
abatement that when, in 1852, he visit
cd Lee "at the head of proud and vic
torious troops, he smiled at the
notion of defeat by any
army that could be sent
against him." It may here be well to
recall remembrance Of the fact that
when Lee reported victory he al
ways asclibsd it to the favor OF ProVl-
dence, not to the nvircibility OF bis
army. In the article under review,
GEN. WoIseley presents himself not
only as military critic, but also as q
politicsl historian thus he writes in
his fist paragraph as follows:
LEES soldiers, we'll yersed as all Ameri,
cans are in the history Of their forefathers
struRQle aPa INST Kin gGeorgo the Third, ano
believing firmly In the Justice OF Their cause
was to be found in the other. This was
point upon which, during my stay in Viz
ginia in 1862, tound every Soulherner laiG
the greatest Stress
Those who thus spoke to him mus
have adapted their language to the
nearer, for by none we're the reso u
tions Of 1889 more generally know
and acce ted as a cardinal creed thar
by Virginians. 1t was the assertion
Of continuance in the State of sover
eighty and independence which haC
been won by the war of the rebellion
against George Ill. Subjects maj
rebel, but in 1881 Virginia was SOY
ara;on State, and it is solecism tt
sneak of the rebellion Of sovereign
In subsequent portion OF the SAM
article Gen. Wolseley shows that h'
had learned from Gen. Lee the South
ern doctrine, but there is an error II
introducing the adjective old to quail
ifv State. Gen. Lee certainly kne v
as did every educated American, tina
the States we're a. equal as to right
and OBJ igatione.
Alter Gen. Lees repugnance 10 sc
cession, Gen. WolseleY writes:
nIn common with all SOu hsrners he firm
iv belieyed that each Of the old states ha
an equal and indisputable right By its II
diyidual constitution, ana ~ IT'S act
Hnion. 10 leave at will the great Union int
= which each had sep rately entered as SOY
ereiQn State This was with him an ertiel
Of faith of which no was as sure ae any div IN
truths he found in the Bill O., This fact mul
always be kept in mind By tho,e who Woui
rightly understand his char1c' er, or q
course he pursued in 1851. DE loved q
union for which his father and family
the previous century bad fought 30 hard an
done 40 much. But he loved his own Sta
stiIl more. ehs was the sovereign to who
In the frst pIao, he owed allegiance, 40
whose orders, as expressed through ~
legally constituted government, ne was,
feft. hound in law, in honor and in love
obey without doubt or hesitation, IN
belief was the handspring that Kept Y
Southern Confederacy going, as IL was Al
the corner stone Of its constitution
Having learned what was the earn!
stone of the COME ieTaey, very hit
reflection might have shown him tn!
the first part Of bis narration as nerel
given was not ia conformity to it, ~
that the war between the States vi
especially different from the uprisir
of the colonies against their Butis
sovereign.
For the information Of his reader
TCORTIBUED ON SEC RD PAGEI